Commons:Administrators/Requests/Theklan

Theklan

Theklan (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · deleted uploads · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 09:20, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

I have been around for many years, and contributed with thousands of images, mine and from archives, and I have seen that admins have too much things to take care of. So I think that it's time to help with those tasks. I have good knowledge of copyright (as far as this is even possible), and experience working with GLAM institutions. My home wiki is Basque Wikipedia, where I'm also an admin and bureaucrat with more than a decade of experience. Thanks for your support! Theklan (talk) 09:20, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

Weak support im OK for this. modern_primat^ඞඞඞ^----TALK 09:56, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good luck.-- Mohammed Qays 🗣 14:39, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral (for now atleast) looks to be a good editor, but does not stand out enough to be sure for certain. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 16:04, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose User's talk page and archives are riddled with successful copyvio and deletion notices. Apocheir (talk) 20:21, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly 'riddled'. Most of them seem to be kept and some downright trollish DRs from an editor who was then indeffed for making them. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:37, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support See no problems. Good Luck. --Wikijunkie (talk) 21:39, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I don't see anything seriously wrong the user that makes me think they can't be an admin (but then I haven't dealt with them outside of this and checking their edit history just now either). The amount of deletion notices on their talk page is troubling though. Not to enough to make me think they should never be an administrator but the role does kind of require a basic understanding of copyright. So IMO it's a little premature. I wouldn't have a problem with them trying to go a while without any of the uploads being nominated for deletion, while they learn about copyright and participate in DRs, and then reapplying. But DRs are the main area that we need administrator to work in though. So it's something a user should have an understanding of to be one. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:15, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose wie Vorredner --Mateus2019 (talk) 10:57, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I see no concerns here and would welcome someone with an interest in Basque culture to broaden our often rather insular outlook. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:37, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Zorte on! Yacàwotçã (talk) 20:37, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I believe they would be a net positive as an administrator, as the answers below show they can process arguments thoughtfully and arrive at reasonable, policy-aligned conclusions. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:27, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support considering the answers below. --Ameisenigel (talk) 13:39, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:07, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support answers indicate knowledge and a sufficient understanding of copyright law. —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 17:15, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Idem. --Yann (talk) 17:35, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good candidate and Basque speaking is a pretty good bonus. Abzeronow (talk) 22:55, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support I've been talking with Theklan for quite a few years now, particularly at offline Wikimedia events and around Wikidata-powered infoboxes. He's a long-term Wikimedian, particularly knowledgeable on the tech side of things as well as his involvement in the Basque (and in general, Spain) parts of the community. He can definitely be trusted with the tools. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 09:31, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support No concerns. ChemSim (Talk) 09:45, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:12, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —— Eric Liu_（Talk） 11:45, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Hi, Could you please explain why you uploaded Commons:Deletion requests/File:Euskal Herria Covid 19 fotomuntaia.jpg, deleted for missing sources, and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Herensuge (euskal mitologia) - Midjourney AI bertsioa.png, deleted for being out of scope? Thanks, Yann (talk) 17:31, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For sure! The first one was a montage I made with files from the category c:Category:COVID-19 pandemic in the Basque Country, but I failed to record the sources of those, so it was deleted. I didn't have time when it was discussed to find the source images, so I didn't challenge the deletion itself. About the Midjourney file, this was uploaded within an experiment to upload AI generated images of mithological beings. It was superseded by another image (you can see it at eu:Herensuge), so an user asked to delete it because it was "out of scope". I don't think it is out of scope, but as the image wasn't in use, the deletion is not completely harmful. Theklan (talk) 15:11, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, here are a few questions about common DRs (feel free to answer inline btw), answer with your first thoughts (of course this may change through the course of the deletion discussion).
1. Someone nominates File:Random logo.png for deletion with the rationale "redundant to File:Random logo.svg". Assume File:Random logo.png is not INUSE.

Redundancy is not itself a reason for deleting. It may be the case that the PNG file has extremely low quality, but even in that case, if the PNG was the original file and the SVG has been made based on the PNG, keeping the original one is a must, as we need it to be sure that the SVG reflects the PNG, and that the derivative has also a provenance. However, there may be reasons to do it, so it can be discussed. -Theklan (talk) 09:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. Someone nominates a 1945 WW2 photo was published in 1945 in Germany. Assume the author is anonymous per Template:PD-anon-70-EU.

I'm not an expert in German copyright laws (that's why we also have German admins), but I would assume that if the photo is anonymous, and no ne has claimed the authorship in the last 80 years (2025-1945), the photo is in the Public Domain as more than 70 years for an anonymous photo published in Germany are enough, even with the new law that requires two different countings. -Theklan (talk) 09:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. Someone nominates a company logo for deletion with the rationale "copyright violation".

Trademark and copyright are not the same thing. We can have a logo of a company if this is simple enough. Both {{PD-textlogo}} and {{Trademark}} may coexist, if the company logo is simple enough. -Theklan (talk) 09:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. Someone nominates a photo that they made 5 years ago for deletion stating "I don't want it on the internet anymore". The photo's subject is quite obscure and we don't have many photos of that subject. Assume no GDPR or related issues.

When a photo is uploaded you give permission to use in perpetuity, so "I don't want it on the Internet anymore" is not a valid reason for deleting. If the image is not in use, we can delete it as courtesy if there's community consensus, it has very low quality or there's something personal in the image that shouldn't be there; but given that the subject is quite obscure, it has been uploaded 5 years ago (not yesterday!), and it might be probable that the image is documenting some article in any of our projects, the most regular outcome would be keeping it. However, the uploader should know that even deleting it doesn't change the fact that it has been published for 5 years with a free license and someone somewhere (outside Wikimedia) may have used it and copied it with that license. -Theklan (talk) 09:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. Someone nominates a photo for deletion stating the data is unreliable and out of date. They provide a link to the correct data but haven't uploaded a file yet with the correct data. The file is in use on multiple projects.

Outdated images shouldn't be deleted based only on that. If we are talking about a map or a graph that should be updated, it should be marked with {{Current}}, but we shouldn't delete the old version, but overwrite it with a new one that reflects the latest data. Also, if the file is in use in various projects, keeping the original might be necessary, because it can be used to show exactly the outdated situation (old borders, for example). -Theklan (talk) 09:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

—Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 16:29, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Four more questions about possible DRs:
- Someone nominates the logo of a (notable, so in scope) company or institution because "there is a new logo, this one is old and not authorized for use anymore. It confuses our customers and is constantly used instead of the new, correct logo." There are no copyright problems with this logo, assume it's too simple to be copyrighted.
- Someone nominates the cover drawing of a 1935 German magazine issue, apparently specifically created for that issue. The artwork is not credited in the magazine, but there is an artist's signature which so far cannot be identified.
- Someone nominates the cover drawing of a 1935 German magazine issue, apparently specifically created for that issue. The artwork is not credited in the magazine, and there is no artist's signature in the drawing.
- Someone nominates the cover photo of a 1935 German magazine issue, apparently specifically created for that issue. The photographer is not credited in the magazine, and there is also no photographer credit in the photo itself.

--Rosenzweig τ 10:22, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]